The Sun. — London, England, 1809-07-20 00:00:00

'LAW REPORT. 'Colfitt-coF 'CEMINCERY, 1 tll. Y 1111AilSHMV V. ISHERWOOD. This, hill had been 'filed by the Plaintiff, h poor man, claiming an estate Tinder a very old family Settlement, the discovery and production of wlfielt, by'lthe Defendant, was prayed by the bill. The cause (and the expences ofAt), Was undertaken, on .the part of the Plaintiff, by a person of the nanie of Newton, upon a stipulation of receiving 5001. year out of the estate, if recovered, and who em ployed a Mr. Ring, .as Solicitor in the cause. In tire progress of it, a.brother of the Plaintiff inter tered -a good deal ; and,. upon a disagreement with • Newton ; made an application to the Court, in th,- name of the Plaintiff, to remove Mr. Bing from being Solicitor 'in the cause; upcn the charges of rielav at , dmiscanduet ; which was ordered accord inely. Upon This, Mr. Newton prevailed on the Plaintiff to Make an affidavit, disclaimii'g all ktiow ledge of, or consent to, his brother's application, and entirely approving of the conduCt of Mr. Ring, as Solicitor, its the cause. The Court upon a motion Lrouoded _on this affidavit, dis Charged its former ordet, restored Mr. Ring as Solicitor for .the Plain tiff, and saddled the Plaintiff's brother with the costs of both applications. It was now again moved, on behalf of the Plain tiff, that Mr. Ring should be discharged from be ing his Solicitor, and that he should pay the costs of the late and present motions. To support this, the-Plaintiff came forward with another affidavit, in which he swore he had been persuaded ,by Mr. Newton to ss ear the former one without being aware of the extent or effect of it, and imputing to him a design of defeating the claim of the Plaintiff, but not charging Mr. Ring with any miscondual, but merely as !miring been employed by Mr. New ton, and therefore praying his removal. • • The LORD CBANCELLOR declared, that, consi dering the charthers of the Solicitors of this Court as their best possession ; and therefore, anxious to preserve them, by Marking the smallest breach of duty, he was obliged to make the first order upon the charge made, and was glad to recall it upon the second application. Upon the present occasion, however, the Plaintiff had cause of complaint as against New was not a 'particle stated, that could involve Mr. Ring (of whose general clia" racier, as a practitioner, his Lordship was pleased to approve) in blame. The Plaintiff certainly had a right to remove Mr. R:ng from being his Solicitor, whenever he plea. , ed, paying him his costs, in which his Lordship dire6ted to be included the costs of the present application. PIERCE V. WATSON. The Plaintiff filed his bill in the charaaer of Pa tentee of a particular process for the tnanufaaure of soap, and praying the Defendant might be restrain ed from the - violation of his patent, by using the prcwes!:. The Defendant, by his answer, de -the Plaintiff was the first inventor of the pro ce s, iind his consequent „rights to the exclusive ex ercise of it. The Court upon • this, directed an is sue, by the Plaintiff bringing an action against the Defendant, for the supposed breach of his right ; and, until that was decided, restrained the Defend ant from the exercise of his claim. The aaion was accordingly broucht, and a Special Jury struck, at the instance of the Plaintiff; and, upon the cause being called on at the present Sitttings, only three of the Sp -cial Jury attended. Th.' , Plaintiff declined to H ray a tales, and the cause Went off without trial. The Defendant now applied to - the Court to dissolve the injunction, on the ground, that the Plaintiffhad not obeyed the spirit of his Lordship's order, by be ing the occasion of the cause not being tried, and the injury the Defendant would sustain, by being there by put over the •I. , ng vacation, without a chance of using that which he claimed a right to, in the mean time. To this it was replied, that it the Plaintiff refused to pray a tales, so did the Defendant ; who was thereby equally the cause of the delay in trying.: the issue ordered by the Court, and tilerefore he had no cause of complaint. The LORD CHAgCRLLOR—“ When a possession is claimed under the sanction of a patent, this Court does not suffer it to be violated without sufficient grounds, and under this principle the issuewas ordered.. The Plaintiff refused to pray a tales, and the Defen dant did the like; thereby distinctly admitting the propriety of 'the cause being tried . by a Special Jury. 1-113 w, then, can 1, under these circumstances, dis solve the injunction ?" The motion was refused, but without costs. HORROCK , V. JUPP. The Defendant in this cause put in a further alE tliva, according to the intimation of the Court on a former day, denying, in the most explicit terms, all knowledge, or consent, of any interview between his daughter and Mr. Horrocks, the minor. The LORD CHAVCELLOR said, he would' take the affidavit home with him, and give his opinion on it to-morrow morning., BURGESS V. BLAND. His Lordship gave judgment upon the motion in this cause for dissolving the injuntlion, restraining 'the Defendant from cutting timber. His Lordship, after stating the cats of the case, (as already before our readers), declared there was no toundation for continuing it, upon the ground on which it wa.;; ori ginally, granted namely, the existance of an agree ment that the Defendant should not cut. If the cau,,e was to proceed, (which his Lornship hoped it would not, by the parties coming to an amicable agreement), it would be necessary to amend the bill, in order to enable the Court to adjust the rights of the several parties interested. JULY 19. HAYMARKET THEATRE. MORRIS V. COLMAY. The LORD CHANCELLOR this day shortly deliver ed his opinion on this cause. He ,observed, that, in leis Opinion, the original agreement between the Proprietors was of such a nature that it could not be fuirilled in the present circumstances.—He should . wish the present parties to-agree to' make a mutual reference to a Master, tor the purpose of forming a new arrangement. He should be glad to'hear, on Saturday next, that the parties had agreed to such a reference; and till then he would say nothing of the other, point'of appointing a new Mantg,'er: tie had no inclination to. take upon himself tit e•management of this Theatre 'during the slimmer. Sir S. ROMILLY (for Mr. Morris, / said, that his 'client was *perfe6.lly willing that such a, reference should be made to a Master,- as that reconamended by his Lordship. JULY 19. ZUGARY V. FURNELL AND ANOTHER.• . IVt;*. GARROW stated this to be an aaion to recover the value of 289 bales; containing ,five dozen each bale, of goat-skins,amonnting to t 8871: 3s. 9d. of the Defendant, -who had bought them of the Plain tiff. The purchase was made on the 27th of April, prompt by acceptance of two bills at the end of fourteen days. On the 15th . May last, the ware house wherein these goods were deposited was con sumed by fire, at the time of the disastrous confla gration among the shipping; on the 19th the bills of exchange were tendered to him for acceptance, by a . gentleman who was clerk to the Plaintiff's at torney, who, at the same time, spewed to the De , fendant the contra& he had entered into; but the Defendant had refused to accept the bills, because the hoods were not -delivered. A - witness would prove a conversation between the Plaintiff and Defen dant on the 11th 'or 12th of May, in which the Defendant admit ted that the goods were at this ware house for him ; that it they were kept there any longer, he :was liable to pay fifteen shillings a week warehouse-rent fol- them ; besides, it was the con stant course of trade, that .when once goods were sold, they were at the risk of the buyer, if any acci dent happened to them. There was no doubt of the sale of these goods, nor any about the price of them, or of the bill' of exchange being tendered to the Defendant for ac ceptance. But as to the rest of the case, it was con siderably involved in doubt upon the evidence of .Mr. Francis Lanegan, the Plaintiff's clerk; and it aL last appeared, that the constant praetice is to count the number of skins in every bale be:ore the buyer takes them, and that these had not been so counted. The Plaintiff was therefore nonsuited. HAWKINS V. WATSON. Tins was an aElion of trover for converting eight tons of Riga hemp, which the Plaintiff bad bought of Messrs. Koffman and Co. which bad been con signed to them by Simes and Co. for sale Upon com mission, in the usual form. When the time for the delivery of the goods arrived, Mr. Hawkins applied. to Mr. Watson, (who was the warehouseman, with whom the goods were deposited by Mess. Koffinan and Co.) for possession of the gobds; but instead of delivering to him the goods, Mr. Watson, to sat* Mr. Hawkins that the goods should, at all events, be his, gave to hitn the following note :—" Sir, the eight tons of Riga hemp, bought of Koffman and Cu. I have transterred.to your name, and shall hold the same at your diposal." After this Mr. Haw kins sent a person to demand the delivery of these goods ; but meanwhile Koffman and Co. had be come bankrupt, and Simes and Co. indemnified Watson for refusing to denier them up.; upon which this attiOn was brought to compel that delivery. It was insinuated, but of that there was no proof, that Mr. Hawkins, being a creditor tot he amount of 3001. on Koffman and Co. had colluded with them upon this occasion, to procure to hiMself a pre ference over the other creditors of Koffman and Co. to the prejudice of Simes,and Co. Verdict - for the Plaintiff—Damages, the amount of the value of the . hern p, 10 I tit. WATERFORD, July 12. On Sunday last between the hours of twelve •and one o'clock in the day, three armed men approached the house of the Rey. J. Blundell, of Annefield, in the county of Kilkenny ; on Mr . . B. first perceiving them, supposing that they were police-men, he ad vanced and asked their business—they demanded his arms—Mr. B. replied—" Wait, my boys, I will give them to you immediately," and ran towards the house, with the intention of defending it. Two of them immediately fired—fortunately one of the guns, which they hadjust taken from Mr.H.Black more's, was only charged with shot, -which slight. ly wounded him from his neck down to his heel, for being at some distance from him when they fired, the 'skin was only 'punctured; the gardener who was standing by him; felt the wind of the ball which was fired from the other musket. Notwith standing a most alive pursuit, by the army, as Noon as arms could be procured, wok place, but the blood-thirsty ruffians have completely etreaed their e.3cape. Accounts of another murder committed in the county of Waterford, have been for some time cur rent ; but we have hitherto avoided adverting to them, as we were rot able before the end of last week to ascertain precisely the fads. The follow ing is the brief 'and afflicting history of this recent and , atrocious transaction :—On the 27th of last month, at noon-day, two men, disguised in female . apparel, came to a house in Knockbuee, where James Hearn, alailor, was employed in his profes sion. One of them, under pretence of lighting his pipe, entered the house, while the other remained at the door. The victim of their revenge, roused by suspicions, of which the cause has probably died with him, immediately leaped from the table on which he sat, and ran out of the house ; he was fired at by the man within, and by his companion, who had taken his station at. the door, but missed by both shots. The murderers closely pursued i and came op with him in a potatoe-garden, at no great distance from the place cif. their first attack, when they instantly shot him through the head, which they afterwards battered almost to pieces with stones. They then direCted their course to wards the mountains, and have hitherto remained undiscovered. HORROCKS V. JUVP. Mr. HEALDE yesteiday read an affidavit of• Jupp, stating, thar'he had never encouraged the vi sits of the minor, P. Horrocks, at Mr. Esdale's, in Baker -street, but, on the contrwry, had remonstrated against them ; that as far as kinguage could go, he bad done every thing in his power to prevent the visits of the minor at his ownl.)ouse, &c. &c. The LORD CHANCELLOR said, this day„ that he had read over Mr, Jupp's ffidavit, and was 'dis posed to place confidence in what that Gentleman had stated. The question its to his committal was. therefore at an end, and he was discharged from. any farther attendance on the Coart. With regard t(; the young Lady his daughter, as well as the young Gentleman, Mr. Horrocl4, his Lordship would make no order at present. JOHNVON AND OTHEttS V. NAPIER AND OTHERS. - This svas , an appeal from a decision of the Master of the Bolls. It appeared that about the year 1798 a considetable number of the bakers in 'London bad formed themselves into a Society to be . called The Amicable Society of Bakers. The tallied of the in stitution was to provide, that each of the Members, on arriving at the age of 60, should have an annuity of 601. for his life, and the life of his widow; the funds for which were to be provided for by the guar= terly or annual contributions of the Members, the amount of which was of course proportioned to the age fit which every Member entered the Society ;-. but ,no one was to be entitled to the benefits of the tun 4 before he had been seven years at least a Mem ber of the Society. About the year 180 . 6, the Com mittee of Management began to suspeEt that the funds and annual receipts- would be insufficient to cover the probable annual expenditure, and the plan of the institution was referred, first to Mr. Morgan, and then to Mr. Fairman, two eminent Attornies, who delivered different opinions. It was suppos ed, however, that the calculations ;upon which the whole of- the plan rested, had not been properly made; and at a General Meeting called by the Corn- Mittee, the matter was taken into consideration. In one of the articles of the original agreement it was provided, that lithe funds should be on the decline, the Committee- might call upon the Members for additional subscriptions. But the General' Meet. ing, notwithStanding this article, came to a reso lution, by a groat majority, that the Society should - be dissolved, and that the funds, amounting in all to about 18,0001. should be divided among the_members, in proportion to the sums which they had itidividually contributed, and the interest upon the same. This was opposed by several of the mem bers who had already become annuitants, and the matter was broughf before the Master of the Rolls, on the ground that if the plan was founded on er— roneous calculations, this was not a reason for break ing up the .institution, but rather for enforcing that article 'of the agreement, which enabled the Society to call for additional 'contributions from the mem bers, and even from the annuitants themselves: The MASTER of the ROLLS decided for the annui tants on this occasion, and decreed that that article should be enforced, which enabled the Society to in= crease the subscriptions. From this decree of his Honour an appeal was now brought before the Lord Chancellor, and Sir S. Ito mill), and Mr. Johnson opened the case on the part of the annuitants, who were Defendants on this ap peal. Farther hearing to-morrow. COURT OF KlNG's BENCH, Tin? 17. KELLY V. DICKSON. This was an a&ion on a policy of insurance upon' some flax-seed which was to come from America, in February last, and upon which there was a con siderable. loss luring the voyage. On account of its arriving too late, the Plaintiff abandoned the whole cargo to the Underwriters ?n the month of June. Lord ELLENZOROUGH thought he had no right to take so much time to make his option, but ought to have given notice of his intention to the Underwriters before. On that part of the cargo, the verdi& would therefore be for the Defendant ; bUt as to the other part, which consisted of staves, it was referred to Mr/Waddington, one of the Special Jury, to ascertain whether the average loss was or was not above three per cent. And the aC•tual price it bore on that 20th was the standard to which to repair for the cMulages upon t his declaration ; which stated that the Defendant sold this wool. in December, and agreed to deliver it on the 20th of January at the market-price it bore on the - day of sale. It Was true that the Plaintiff waited until the 28th ; bdt that ixas not his contract, and if he chused to wait, and the price of wool rose in the interim, it was his own fault. He could not recover any thing on that account . , unless he had declared,, specially, that the agreement had been extended for those eight days ; and of this opinion was Lord . Ellenborough, and therefore , for want of that statement in the declaration, the Plaintiff 'lost about a thousand pounds, the damages given by the verdict} being-confined to the price of the article on' the 20th—which was 21601. JONES V. COUGILL. This was an aetion on a bill of exchange for wool. drawn arid indorsed by Mr. Horrocks, and accepted by the Defendant. It appeared that it was, an ac commodation bill that had been placed in the Plain tiff's hands by the drawer for a debt of 2741. which he owed him. The Plaintiff was not therefore en titled to recover the whole amount of the bill, and a vtrdiet was found for the Plaintiffs--Damages 2741. JULY 18. KINGSTON V. ANDREWS. The ATTORNI.EY-GENERAL stated this to be an a&ion against the Defendants, Messrs. Andrews, for not delivering to the Plaintiff •a certain quantity of what is called English Spanish wool, contraaled for in December,' and to be delivered on the 20th of Ja nuary last. The Plaintiff had the highest opinion of these Defendants, believect it was not their fault that this wool was not delivered, for they dePenckil upon another, who had disappointed them by the want of supply of that article ; but the Plaintiff had no remedy except this adion, and the Defendants would, afterwards, have their remedy over against the person who had undertaken, but omitted, to sup ply that article to them. The quantity brought by the I Plaintiff of the Defendants was 120 packs, ainuunt to 28,0001 b. and the- difference upon the price of the article at the time it vs bought, which was the price at which it was agreed to be deliver ed; and that of the time when it was found that it was not to be delivered at all, wits upwards of 30001. which he the, tiff now sought to,recover. Mr. Serjeau t T took an objection to the charge being made to thii,cxeo l o4 that the difference of price in wool at the tiniekat''s - ate,. when it v‘ as agreed to deliver it on the ihttli 'of 4144,y, at that pike, LONDON: : Printed"by RICHARD H A RRIS,. of. No. 4, Martlett-coart, Bow -street; and Published by WILLIAM AR VIIGIiR SC RIPI , S, outh hl At the SqN-Oprica, No. 112, Strand; where Advertisements, Orders for the Paper, Letters for the Editor, eke. (post-paia), u , - _ . .. , _ , INF.T:INEED'A Y . , JULY 19. , .. john Rotinsoh stood indicted f or feloniously ap,, propriating to hi's ON:vn use a crantity of h an d-bill s entrusted 'to his care, by Mr. Ellistow of the Royal Circu's, to be deliVered to 'the Public, 'announcing the performances to be exhibited in that Th ea t re . The Prisoner *is erroneously indided it cOmmon, law, and was consequently acquitted." Cardinal Wills stood indided tor having embez zled to his own use sundry sums of money, which he received on account of MeSSrs. Biggs and Btir: ;nett, sworn coal-meters for the county of Surry. • Mr. RUiiNINGTO the Counsel for the - Proseeti 7 tiOn, stated; that theindidment was founded on the 86th clause of the 39th of the King, which enata:i ed, "That all clerks or servants convicted of co verting to their own use monies 'received On thei'r master's account, without their said master's concur . - rence, should be deemed guilty of felony." The pri 7 soner, in the present case, stared, he was employed by the prosecutors, in pursuance of an Ad of Parlia ment, to assist them in the execution of their clti ties; and for that service, as stipulated in the said Ad of Parliament, he was to receive f..?os. per week. It also appeared, that the Coal -meters of the county, of Surrey were remunerated for their trouble, by a fee on each chaldroa of coals measured within their distrid. , The Prisoner was stationed at Jamaica Wharf, as the Sworn -meter, to superintend the mea surin , t'coals, and receive the stip u l ate d f ees f or t h at duty n -the execution of whi c h o ffi ce h e converte d to hi own use sundry sum s o f money paid to him by M. Dickinson, the p ro pii e t ur o f t h e w h ar f , as fiS the legal meters' tees. _ _ Mr - .Not.Ast, for the Prisoner; took an objeetion to the informality of, the indiament ; and contended; that the charge alleged against his client, did not come within the meaning of the statute alluded t o by Mr. Runnington ; as the Prisoner was aCling, not as the clerk or servant of Messrs. Biggs and Burnett, but as the sworn servant of the public. Mr. RUNNINGTO, in an ingenious argument, ar gued, _that the Prisoner 'having been appointed by the Prosecutors to execute a duty on their account, and to receive for them the legal fees for the execu tion of that duty, tor their benefit and advantage solely, could be considered in no other light than as their servant or clerk. In this opinion he was over-ruled by Mr. Serjeant ONSLOW and the Court, who were of opinion that a similar construuion might as well be put on the appointment of persons under the commissioners of Excise, or any other public tunaionaries. ,It did not follow, because au A& of Parliament entitled any body of men to appoint certain assistants under them, that therefore these assistants were legally the servants of the persons. who appointtd them. The Prisoner was consequently acquitted. Cornelius Browne, alias Hamilton, was indicted for stealing a quanitity of brass and iron from the premises of Messrs. Brent, in the Commercial Road, and found guility. The prisoner being an old of fender, and but recently returned from Botany Bay, was aga►n sentenced to seven years' transportation. George Parsons, another Did offender, and but a few weeks from Botany Bay, was likewise convi&ed of picking the packet of a gentleman, named Fergu son, of a pocket-book, containing bank-notes to the amount of eight pounds. He was also sentenced to seven years transportation. CHARGE or BlGAMY.—Yesterday. Henry Mester man was examined at Bow -street, on a charge of feloniously intermarrying with Eliza Redman, his former wife Jannett being then alive. The prose cutrix, who is a very young woman, 'had been in the service of Mr. Johnson, late of Bow -street, Co vent-garden, for several years, where she hair aCcur mulated a small sum of money, when she became acquainted with the prisoner, who passed for a sin 'gle man, and who, immediately after marrying her, plundered her of her hard earnings, and then left her to the mortifying discovery of his having a former wife living.----The Prisoner's first - marriage being proved, and that his wife w.ls alive at the time the second took place, he was committed for trial. SHOCKING ACCiDENT.—On Sunday evening a' party of eight who had spent a convival day at Suu bury, were returning to London, when the boat in which they were was upset, in consequence of run ning foul of a pile, and two persons, Julia Mane and a young man of the ruame of Porter, were drowned. The body of Miss Mane was " found in half an hour after the 'accident, and a Coroner's Jury has brought in a verdirl of accidental death. The young man, who Was a clerk, was found yes terday. • SHIP GRAVESEND, JULY 18. Arrived—the Mars, Finlay, Irani America ; and the Bird, Pringle, from Quebec. , BIRTHS. On the ir4th inst. the Lady of Brigadier. General Skinner. of a Son. On Tuesday last, at Dalston, the Lady of Peter Favenc, Esq. Oa Son. a estenlay, in St. James's-place, the wife of Thomas Bon_ nor, Esq. The same morning, Mrs. Lackington, of Finsbury-place, of a Daughter. MARRIED. ' Lately, Lord Grey De Ruthyn. to Ann Maria Ke daughter of WilliatuA.ell,up, Esq. of Rytott-upon-Duus- , more, Warwickshire: Ulk D. t On Sunday evening, at :Bath, aged 87, John Charnock, Esq. late of the island of Barbadoes. estealay, at the Hon. Colonel St. Leger's house irr Sloane-street, after a lingering illness, the Hon. Mrs. St., Le ger. On Thursday last, • Mr. Peter Cary, of Coswell-street. On the meth of last month, at Martinique, atter an illness of only tour days, Eleza, the wife of I oseph Bullock, Esq. Commissary-General to iiis Majesty's Forces in the West On the 2.9 th of December, at Rombay, in the East Indiesi Lieutenant Stephen Skirrow, second son of the late john Skirrow, Esq. of Line°ln's-inn. .S/UCK.S RDAY. India Stock, India Bonds, 2os. as. pr. r Exclicq. pills, its. 6s. pl. Ornniutn, t ii pr. Imperial.; per Cent. Ditto Ann. Cons. tor Opening, 69-ii I I I UP 1 Bank Stock. Navy c per Cent. 98 5 per Cent. 170, Irish s per Cent. 4 per Cent. 84 g 3 per Cent. lied. 68 7i as• 3 per ::ent. Cons. 68it Bank L. Ann. 181 13-16ths I tm-st reet, G rosvenor sqtare,, tu3t b 2 HddiC3sel.